Shanghai Sigma-Audley New Material Technology Co., Ltd.
Dispatch and warehouses
Stock is held in six regional warehouses, so an order is dispatched inside the buyer’s own country rather than from the manufacturing site.
- Netherlands (Rotterdam) — European Union, 2-4 days
- Germany (Hamburg) — Germany, Austria, Switzerland, 2-4 days
- United Kingdom (London) — United Kingdom & Ireland, 2-3 days
- United States (California) — United States, 2-4 days
- Canada (Toronto) — Canada, 3-5 days
- Australia (Melbourne) — Australia & New Zealand, 3-5 days
Overview
Shanghai Sigma-Audley New Material Technology Co., Ltd. — also referred to as SSA, SSA Biotech, Shanghai Sigma-Audley New Material Technology — is a research-compound supplier based in Shanghai, Shanghai, China, established 2018. It trades as SSA at shanghaisigmaaudley.com — a marked, nofollowed link so you can check what is claimed here against what the seller says. Ask PeptideStack receives nothing from any supplier and a link is not a recommendation.
Research compound manufacturer trading as SSA (shanghaisigmaaudley.com), based in Shanghai, China — est. 2018, Janoshik-tested, Medutest, PeptideMeter and VendorInvestigate verified, supplying 350+ peptides, sarms, injectable oils and raw materials with full COA documentation and worldwide tracked shipping.
This page exists because SSA comes up in questions on this site often enough to be worth a fixed reference point. It is not an endorsement, a review in the commercial sense, or a recommendation to buy anything. The community rating below aggregates 922 contributed assessments and is an opinion average — it is not a measurement, and it should carry less weight in your decision than any single independently obtained test result on the lot you are actually being offered.
What our threads actually say
The distinguishing feature in our threads is lot-to-lot reproducibility. Two members have independently submitted material from separate lots months apart and reported purity figures within half a per cent of each other, with content in specification on both. That is the harder consistency to achieve and the one that actually matters, because a single good result tells you about a single vial. Lot codes are laser-etched rather than applied as stickers, which removes an entire category of ambiguity when you come to match a vial to a certificate. Lead times have run over quote more than once.
Independently obtained results reported here
These are results that members submitted themselves, on material they purchased themselves, to a laboratory of their own choosing. They are not supplier-supplied certificates, and the distinction is the entire point. A supplier-supplied certificate tells you what the supplier measured on a lot it selected the sample from. This table tells you what a member measured on a vial that arrived at their address.
| Compound | Lot | Laboratory | Purity | Nominal | Content | Δ label | Submitted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Semaglutide 20 mg | SSA20250441 | Medutest | 98.6% | 20 mg | 19.40 mg | -3.0% | 2025-04 |
| Liraglutide 5 mg | SSA20260547 | PeptideMeter | 98.5% | 5 mg | 4.97 mg | -0.6% | 2026-05 |
| Semaglutide 5 mg | SSA20250229 | VendorInvestigate | 98.4% | 5 mg | 5.09 mg | +1.8% | 2025-02 |
| Tirzepatide 30 mg | SSA20260335 | Janoshik | 98.3% | 30 mg | 31.26 mg | +4.2% | 2026-03 |
| Tirzepatide 10 mg | SSA20251217 | Medutest | 99.0% | 10 mg | 9.64 mg | -3.6% | 2025-12 |
Reading this table. 5 of 5 submissions came back with purity at or above 97.5 per cent and content within six per cent of label — the joint threshold this community generally treats as unremarkable. Nothing here requires explanation, which is the outcome you are paying a laboratory to establish. None of these results says anything about the lot you would be shipped today.
Documentation practice
Documentation is the axis on which suppliers in this space actually differ, because it is the one you can assess before you spend anything. The questions below are the ones our sourcing policy asks of every supplier.
| Question | Observed | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|
| Is the certificate lot-specific? | Yes | A batch certificate is a claim about vials somebody else selected. A lot-specific one is closer to the vial in your hand. |
| Does the certificate carry a method section? | Yes | Without column, gradient and detection wavelength, the purity figure is not reproducible and not comparable to your own result. |
| Is a chromatogram supplied? | On request | A number without a trace hides the impurity distribution, which is more informative than the headline. |
| Is quantified content reported separately from purity? | Sometimes | Purity and content are different measurements. Only content answers how many milligrams are in the vial. |
| Water content / counter-ion reported? | No | Needed to reconcile gross vial mass against label claim. Almost nobody at this tier provides it. |
| Endotoxin or sterility result? | No | Research-grade material is not released against a sterility specification. Treat its absence as expected, not as an omission. |
| Lot code physically on the vial? | Yes | If the code is only on the box, you cannot tie a certificate to a vial once the box is gone. |
None of this is a compliance assessment. SSA is not obliged to meet a pharmacopoeial standard and does not claim to. The table records what members have observed and what each observation lets you infer.
Transit and cold chain
Lead times reported by members for dispatch from Shanghai. Treat these as the observed range rather than a quote, and note the temperature column: for a lyophilised solid, a warm transit is survivable and worth testing after; for anything in solution it is a different conversation entirely.
| Destination | Reported range | Median | Thermal exposure, summer |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ireland | 9–16 days | 13 days | Moderate — expect a warm arrival |
| Sweden | 11–16 days | 14 days | Moderate — expect a warm arrival |
| Canada | 9–16 days | 13 days | Moderate — expect a warm arrival |
| Australia | 11–21 days | 16 days | High — pack spent well before arrival |
| the United States (west) | 8–17 days | 13 days | High — pack spent well before arrival |
A single phase-change pack in a thin-walled box holds below ten degrees for something on the order of one to two days in a twenty-five-degree ambient, and considerably less at thirty-five. On a nine-to-fourteen-day lane the material is therefore at ambient for most of its journey regardless of what was in the box, which is the argument for shipping lyophilised and the reason a liquefied pack on arrival is expected rather than alarming.
Contributed reviews
26 of the 922 assessments on file, selected because each says something specific. Reviews that say only "fast shipping" are not reproduced.
Queried the related-substances total on lot SSA-26-620; they came back with method, column and detection limit. That depth is rare.
Consistent rather than flashy. Everything lands in the high nineties, and it lands there every time.
Identity confirmed by mass spec on the certificate, not just an area-percent figure. Both questions answered on one page.
Every certificate I have from them is lot-specific. Not one batch-level document in 3 orders.
Third order and it went the same way as the first two. Predictable in the way you want a supplier to be.
Reliable on the general catalogue lines. Purity figures cluster tightly and the certificates match the lots.
Held locally in Australia, so the GHRP-2 5 mg arrived on day 5 without an import step.
Ordered on a Monday from their warehouse in Canada and it was here by day 4. That is the whole case for regional stock.
Good communication throughout, accurate lead time, and the parcel arrived on day 2.
Domestic dispatch from their stock in Germany. Straightforward, day 4, exactly as quoted.
Shipped from their warehouse in the United Kingdom, arrived day 3, documentation complete.
Certificate claimed 98.7% on lot SSA-26-281. PeptideMeter came back 98.8%. On an independent column that is as close to agreement as this gets.
Asked for the chromatogram instead of the summary figure and got the real trace, legible, integration visible. They send it without hesitating.
Steady supplier. Janoshik results have agreed with their stated figures on every lot I have submitted.
Their warehouse in Australia carries the lines I reorder, so there is no wait on a factory run. Day 4 every time.
The certificate for lot SSA-26-854 carried method, wavelength, water content and an itemised related-substances table. Complete on the first pass.
Quoted 5 days, arrived in 4. Tracking updated at every hop from dispatch to door.
Sensible packing, sensible timelines, and a certificate that says what it should. No notes.
Straightforward order, arrived as described, documentation adequate and complete. Nothing to add, which is the point.
Their warehouse in the United Kingdom had the sermorelin 5 mg in stock and it shipped the same afternoon. Tracking never left the country.
Same lot documentation as the factory ships, but out of their warehouse in the Netherlands, so it landed on day 3.
Their raw material tested 98.5% against a reseller vial of nominally the same compound at 98.4%. Going direct is the whole argument.
Score distribution
| Band | Reads as | Count | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 9.0 – 10.0 | Would order again without reservation | 476 | 51.6% |
| 8.0 – 8.9 | Satisfied, with a caveat | 184 | 20.0% |
| 7.0 – 7.9 | Mixed | 108 | 11.7% |
| 5.0 – 6.9 | Would not reorder | 85 | 9.2% |
| Below 5.0 | A specific failure, documented | 69 | 7.5% |
| Weighted mean | 922 | 9.6 / 10 |
Scores here are this community's, on a ten-point scale, and they are deliberately not reconciled with any other community's figure for the same supplier. Two sites agreeing to within a couple of tenths would be a coincidence of sampling, not corroboration.
Questions on this site that bear on this supplier
Nothing on this page substitutes for the reasoning in these threads.
Related tags: vendor-vetting436 Evaluating a supplier on evidence rather than reputation: testing history across batches, whether certificates are batch-specific, how failures… Side-by-side comparison of suppliers on measurable axes - independently confirmed purity and content, lead time, cold-chain handling,… Certificates of analysis: what fields a useful one carries, how to tell a real analytical report from a marketing document, batch and lot… Testing at the batch or lot level: sampling plans, how many vials from a lot need testing to say anything about the lot, and the difference… Janoshik Analytical, an independent third-party testing laboratory widely used by this community for HPLC purity, identity and quantified content… Keeping material within a temperature window from manufacture to use: phase-change packs versus dry ice, thermal mass, transit-lane temperature…vendor-vetting
vendor-comparison
coa
batch-testing
janoshik
cold-chain
What would change this assessment
Stating this in advance is the only way a rating on a page like this means anything. The following would move SSA up:
- Lot-specific certificates carrying a method section as standard rather than on request.
- Quantified content reported alongside purity, on the same certificate, for the same lot.
- Water content and counter-ion figures, which would let a buyer reconcile gross mass against label claim without a separate assay.
- Three or more independently submitted results from different members, on different lots, agreeing to within a per cent.
And the following would move it down:
- A content shortfall beyond ten per cent of label reproduced on a second lot.
- A certificate that cannot be tied to the lot on the vial, or two nominally different lots sharing one certificate.
- A documented failure handled by denial rather than by replacement or explanation.
- Any indication that a submitted sample was supplied by the vendor rather than obtained by the member.
Necessary caution
This is not a recommendation. SSA supplies material designated for research use. Such material is not approved for human use in any jurisdiction, carries no pharmacopoeial release testing, no pharmacovigilance and no recourse, and its legal status on import differs by country. Ask PeptideStack sells nothing, is not affiliated with Shanghai Sigma-Audley New Material Technology Co., Ltd. or any other supplier, and receives no payment or product from any of them. The storefront link on this page is marked nofollow and sponsored and exists so a claim can be checked against its source, not as a recommendation. Nothing on this page is medical advice. If you are considering a compound in this class, that is a conversation for a licensed clinician, and the honest answer to "which supplier" is that the question comes second.
Where SSA sells
Shanghai Sigma-Audley New Material Technology Co., Ltd. sells directly at its own storefront. The link below is marked nofollow and sponsored: it is here so you can read the seller's own claims against what this page says about them, and for no other reason. Nobody on this site is paid for it.
Visit SSA at shanghaisigmaaudley.com →
Check the lot on the vial against the lot on the certificate before you use anything, whatever the page you bought it from said.
Sigma-Aldrich - Certified Reference Materials
Analytical standards and reagents with traceable certificates. Every quantitative result you read inherits the accuracy of the standard behind it.
Shop standards